If marriages are religious practices, then they need to be only the jurisdiction of the church, and not up for any legal battle over what is or isn't right. Other than that, if you say someone is in your family, that should be good enough for anyone else.

If the culture were stronger, any union that was immoral or anti-natural would be banished, without the assistance of mob rule politics.

As far as rape and enslavement go, well most civilized governments ban those practices, so they aren't even up for debate.

1. Nuclear Family: Ideal. Should be a virgin. Arranged by wise parents would be better than 50%+ divorce rate and broken families.

2. If Widow does not have a child, she should have one by the brother to continue family line. Unlike modern society, after marriage she is part of the male's family.

3. Concubines: I'm not for it, but high end genetic material could reproduce at a higher rate.

4. Rapist must pay father. Seems like a good solution, esp. with possibility of woman lying and claiming rape. If she lost her virginity to a man, she should marry him + he has to be responsible for her.

5. Woman's property is man's property. Yes as head of household.

6. Prisoners of war: Kill the males, steal the virgins, spread your seed. Warlike + this is how Iceland started. Would also better represent male role as warrior / defender and backbone of society. If males fail, society is destroyed.

7. Polygany: If the male can manage it and is of high genetic worth, might be beneficial.

7. Slave + Slave: I don't like slavery, but it would make sense for masters to breed their slaves similar to how one treats dogs/cattle.

1. Nuclear Family: Ideal. Should be a virgin. Arranged by wise parents would be better than 50%+ divorce rate and broken families.

2. If Widow does not have a child, she should have one by the brother to continue family line. Unlike modern society, after marriage she is part of the male's family.

3. Concubines: I'm not for it, but high end genetic material could reproduce at a higher rate.

4. Rapist must pay father. Seems like a good solution, esp. with possibility of woman lying and claiming rape. If she lost her virginity to a man, she should marry him + he has to be responsible for her.

5. Woman's property is man's property. Yes as head of household.

6. Prisoners of war: Kill the males, steal the virgins, spread your seed. Warlike + this is how Iceland started. Would also better represent male role as warrior / defender and backbone of society. If males fail, society is destroyed.

7. Polygany: If the male can manage it and is of high genetic worth, might be beneficial.

7. Slave + Slave: I don't like slavery, but it would make sense for masters to breed their slaves similar to how one treats dogs/cattle.

1. Not ideal if its an exceptional man of whom we want many more of. Such a man requires many wives, preferably the daughters of other such distinguished men.

2. Agreed

3. Its ok if the concubines are sterilized and purely for enjoyment. May be considered disrespectful to the true wives however, so I'm not in favor.

4. I believe if it was a clear case of rape, the man should be murdered by the womans family. The virgin shouldn't be married to her rapist in any circumstance, that is insanity. To me this is the worst form of marriage on the chart.

5. No slaves, the institution of slavery has been humanities curse (by allowing the idiotic to live)

6. The virgins harbor genetics that the losers have, do you want your kids to be the grandson of a loser? Sterilize if you want but certainly no breeding. Similar to 3

7. Best form for the best men.

Double 7. SLAVES MUST DIE, NO SLAVES, NO PRISONERS, NO WEAKNESS. PICK YOUR OWN DAMN CROPS.

6. The virgins harbor genetics that the losers have, do you want your kids to be the grandson of a loser? Sterilize if you want but certainly no breeding. Similar to 3

This one isn't really accurate. Though a man/tribe/nation may fall in battle, that does not mean they are of poor genetic stock. Northern European pagan religions in particular speak against this notion - a worthwhile man was expected to die in battle eventually. Of course, in the event that said people were defeated without much of a fight(e.g. France in WW2), you are correct. But many of those who have, throughout history, lost a war were nevertheless men of immense strength and will - Hannibal, Arminius, Robert E. Lee, Crazy Horse, Spartans, the lone Norse defender of Stamford Bridge, and his lord King Harald Sigurdsson, who were defeated by the Anglo-Saxon King Harold II, a mighty man in his own right who himself was defeated only weeks later by William the Conqueror, are just a few very obvious examples.

Many of those virgins would be very aggressive and able to be used effectively in battlefield situations, if they were not products of broken realities. The driving impetus of many migrations and invasions is that of aggressive men who cannot compete with the established locals. They go and colonize new areas time and time again. The virgin loser at home in Norway went to Kiev, and if he was smart, fortunate, and did not die, could have done well for himself. Women are attracted to security and wealth because it allows them to feel safe, thus they will select for someone which has those characteristics. However, they are also attracted to other traits that many people can cultivate more simply by discipline alone: physical strength and being stubborn.

Cultures that place limits on sexual practice are still today rather aggressive.

The rise of feminism has, I think, proven once and for all that that hypergamous promiscuity is a very female thing. The sexually "persmissive" society is by its nature a feminized society. It selects for some pretty secondary and terrible things in men. Men place too much store in their honor for that to ever happen, if only they realize and assert it.

Do we really want people who rape someone to marry their victims? That seems like some of the worst genes to be passing on.

I can understand if a woman cries wolf, but what if she is too ashamed to admit she has been raped (as many women would be)?

As an aside - I'm all about polygamy between two consenting parties. Men or women. Why keep concubines/whores around when a man could have a bunch of wives, or a woman a bunch of husbands (this one seems far less likely)? If they're healthy, wise people, I don't see much wrong there.